Changing Audience Expectations: Celebrity, Social Media, and Parasocial Relationships

The term ‘Parasocial Relationship’ was, until recently, somewhat confined to discourse in Sociology departments. It was coined by Horton and Wohl in 1956 to refer to a psychological relationship experienced by members of an audience in mediated encounters with performers in mass media (particularly television)¹. The term has entered the common lexicon with social media offering opportunities for engagement between celebrities and their audience. Increased potential interaction adds new implications to parasocial relationships. Additionally, the changing nature of celebrity (the “Influencer”) feels more intimate. Celebrity (in the 20th and 21st centuries especially) has involved the commodification of the individual. Social media has only added to this. Perceived intimacy amplifies problematic audience expectations and feelings of entitlement. In this article, we examine audience expectations and the nature of celebrity, social media, and parasocial relationships. 

The Parasocial Relationship

You may belong to a group or organization in which an individual is renowned. Such relationships depend on reciprocal personal or direct parasocial contact (speeches, presentations, lessons). 
This differs from the relationship between fan/follower and celebrity/influencer where all interaction is essentially one-sided and mediated or facilitated by app, television,  journalist, or publicist. It’s possible, for example, to have a parasocial relationship with a celeactor. A celeactor is a well-known fictional character such as James Bond, Carrie Bradshaw, Borat, or members of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

A sense of intimacy or closeness may develop when a person is attached to a media personality. This is not real intimacy as the “personality” likely doesn’t know of the other person’s existence. The idea of a parasocial relationship may make you uncomfortable. It might bring to mind incidents of stalking or unhealthy obsession. But generally, it is perfectly normal and psychologically healthy. As Dr. Cynthia Vinney points out in an article for Thought Co, “Humans are wired to make social connections. Media did not exist through a majority of human evolution, and so when consumers are presented with a person or person-like individual via video or audio media, their brains respond as if they were engaging in a real-life social situation”.

The Celebrity as Commodity

Defining Celebrity

Much of the information in this section can be found in the book Celebrity by Chris Rojek. In this comprehensive work, Professor Rojek defines celebrity first as, “the attribution of glamorous or notorious status to an individual within the public sphere” he expands by adding that celebrities are cultural fabrications split between private and public selves.

Social psychologist George Herbert Mead argued that the split between the “I” (the ‘veridical’ or true self) and the “Me” (the self as seen by others) is the human condition, at least since ancient times, in Western Society ².

So the public presentation of self is always staged. We present a front or face to others while keeping a portion of the self in reserve. 

A paradox of fame is that the public face can become alien to the veridical self or, worse, the veridical self is considered “inauthentic”. 

I would love to be like Cary Grant

Cary Grant

Commodification

Rojek identifies three interrelated historical processes that have led to a public preoccupation with celebrity; The Democratization of Society, The Decline of Organized Religion, and the Commodification Of Everyday Life.

As the focus here is how commodification relates to audience expectation I’m focusing on the third of these processes.

Capitalism requires consumers to develop an abstract desire for commodities. The abstract quality renders desire alienable from consumers as they are required to replace strong commodity wants with new ones. The compulsion of abstract desire under capitalism transforms the individual from a desiring object into a calculating object of desire. 

Celebrity culture is an essential tool of commodification as it embodies desire. It “provides consumers with compelling standards of emulation”. And the commodification does not end with death (as illustrated by Monroe, Dean, Presley, Lennon, Sinatra, Cobain, Princess Diana, etc.)

While the formation of parasocial relationships are normal that they form within a culture that commodifies individuals has negative consequences for both the audience and celebrity. This is more obvious in the age of social media.

Social Media and False Intimacy

The Problem With Social Media

In this space, we have covered many of the unhealthy aspects of social media with articles addressing cyberbullying, status popularity, and compulsive behavior.

When the lack of restraint of communicating online is combined with the entitlement an audience feels towards a celebrity, harms can be multiplied.  

Examples of Audience Reactions and Responses

As a result of social media, people have multiple ways to follow celebrities and feel connected to them. Access changes the parasocial relationship. Celebrities can respond to fans. This creates an appearance of connection, though it is still largely one-sided. Examples of audience entitlement are not hard to find.

Patton Oswalt

Fifteen months after the comedian Patton Oswalt shared the devastation of the sudden death of his wife Michelle McNamara he announced his engagement to Meredith Salenger. An article on the engagement was met with harsh judgment in the comments. The audience seemed to feel that because he had shared his grief they had a right to express in what manner he should grieve.

Britney Spears

Recently the #Freebritney movement has proved essential in removing her from a conservatorship that was objectively long and restrictive. But the flip side of such movements is they are dependent on the assumptions of spectators giving opinions as though they are privy to intimate family matters or struggles.

The public spectacle of Britney’s mental health issues prior to her conservatorship may have exasperated the situation. At the very least it was undeniably harmful. Assumptions and speculation put the onus on the celebrity to share private and intimate life details lest they (or their situation) be misunderstood. 

John Mulaney

A recent spike in references to parasocial relationships resulted from comedian John Mulaney’s rehab stint, divorce, new relationship with Olivia Munn, and the announcement that she was pregnant. Fans reacted with hurt, anger, and judgment.

A spate of articles were written just to remind people that they don’t actually know him. They know his comedy. Take the Slate article “John Mulaney Doesn’t Owe You Squat” (the subtitle of which is He’s not your friend, as much as you might think he is). 

The Influencer and Follower Expectations

Social media is built to encourage parasocial relationships. But while musicians, actors, writers, comedians, or models gain a following for reasons outside of the platforms many Influencers have their following solely as a result of them.
 
Celebrity carries the assumption of power by way of influence. But social media celebrities are often more beholden to and less protected from their followers. There can be hyper-vigilant criticism bordering on, or actually becoming, bullying.

And the entitlement resulting from the allusion of intimacy is amplified as Influencers are often in their homes and speaking directly to their audience. Stylist and influencer Stephanie Yeboah provided Refinery 29 with examples of people sending voice messages asking why she hadn’t responded to their latest messages, or people asking for details about her friends and family.

What Can Be Done

Once again awareness is key. While there is nothing inherently bad about parasocial relationships understanding how they become problematic is helpful. Part of this is grasping how celebrity culture commodifies individuals and how we consume the persona that results.

If you are a parent, understanding the unique challenges of raising digital natives and teaching your children about the technology they use (and the goals of the companies creating the latest app) is important.

And should you feel “let down” by a celebrity you admire, a check in with yourself is likely a good idea.

Be mindful. And nurture real relationships with mentors, friends, and family.

---

---

Sources

1. Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction, Interpersonal and Biological Processes, Vol. 19, 1956, Donald Hort
2. Celebrity, by Chris Rojek
3. Parasocial Relationships: Definition, Examples, and Key Studies, Thought Co, Cynthia Vinney
4. The Internet is Obsessed With Parasocial Relationships, Refinery 29, Sadhbh O’Sullivan
5. John Mulaney Doesn’t Owe You Squat, Slate, Madison Malone Kircher

Further Research and Reading

1. “Digital buddies”: parasocial interactions in social media, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, Mujde Yuksel, Lauren I. Labrecque
2. John Mulaney was performing a role all along, Vox, Aja Romano
3. The Systemic Abuse of Celebrities, Broey Deschanel (43 minute runtime)